We stopped marketing Murror as an AI app. Downloads went up 40%.
For the first year of Murror, every landing page, every ad, every App Store screenshot led with the same thing: "AI-powered self-compassion."
It checked all the boxes. AI was the hot keyword. Investors loved it. It felt modern.
But our conversion rates were mediocre. People would land on the page, skim, and bounce.
When we finally sat down and asked churned users why they left, the answer surprised us. It wasn't that the AI wasn't good enough. It was that they never really understood what the app would do for them.
"AI-powered" told them how we built it. It didn't tell them how they'd feel using it.
So we ran an experiment. We rewrote everything. Instead of leading with technology, we led with the emotional outcome:
"AI-powered journaling" became "finally feel heard"
- "Smart emotional analysis" became "understand why you really feel that way"
- "AI companion" became "a space where you don't have to perform"
The results were immediate. App Store page conversion went up 40%. But more interestingly, the users who came in through the new messaging retained better too. They came in with the right expectations.
Here's what I think is happening across the AI space right now: we're all so excited about the technology that we're marketing the engine instead of the destination. It's like a car company selling horsepower to people who just want to get their kids to school safely.
The best AI products will eventually stop saying "AI" in their marketing altogether. The technology becomes invisible. The outcome becomes everything.
If you're building an AI product right now, try this: remove every mention of "AI" from your landing page. Read it back. Does it still make someone want to sign up? If not, you might be selling the technology instead of the transformation.
Would love to hear from other founders: have you experimented with de-emphasizing AI in your positioning? What happened?
Replies
'Finally feel heard' vs 'AI powered journaling' that's a masterclass in outcome vs feature writing. Night & Day.
Murror
@ruby_cooper Exactly! That shift from feature to outcome language was honestly one of the hardest things to let go of — we were so proud of the tech that we forgot users don't care about how it works. They care about how it makes them feel. Glad the distinction resonated with you.
This looks like a filler word to me nowadays - so definitely makes sense. I hate seeing "AI" everywhere
@sk_uxpin I’ve noticed the same pattern in my own projects: removing the “AI label” often increases trust. Maybe people connect more with usefulness than buzzwords.
Murror
@sk_uxpin Totally get that. It's become background noise at this point. The irony is that the more everyone slaps "AI" on everything, the less it actually means to people. We found that just describing what the product does — without the label — made users way more curious to try it.
@monatruong_murror very fair point - it's become noise indeed and it actually is irritating people
Murror
@edikan_peters Love the fintech example — that really nails it. "Real-time transaction monitoring" vs "know exactly where your money is going" is the same product but speaks to completely different people. The person who signs up for the outcome version is also way more likely to stick around because their expectations match the experience. Great point about this being an older pattern that AI just made more visible.
@monatruong_murror Yes, thank you 😄
TinyCommand
Completely agree with this. We definitely live in an AI overload phase right now where everything seems to have AI attached to it, even things that honestly do not need it.
I get multiple people every day asking to build an “AI agent” for almost anything under the sun, and a lot of the time they do not even need an AI agent. What they actually want is a problem solved.
“AI-powered” explains the mechanism. It does not explain the value.
I think the winning message is:
“Here’s the outcome you’ll get.”
Not:
“Here’s the technology stack we used to get there.”
Because honestly, most users do not care whether it was AI, an API call, a workflow, or a cron job underneath as long as the result is achieved.
Murror
@priyanka_gosai1 This is so well put. "What they actually want is a problem solved" — that's the whole thing right there. We see it too: people don't come to Murror looking for AI. They come because they want to feel understood. The tech is just how we deliver that. Thanks for sharing your perspective from TinyCommand — sounds like you see this pattern across the board.
This is a useful result because it also changes who self-selects into the product. “AI-powered journaling” attracts people who are shopping a category; “finally feel heard” attracts people who recognize the moment they need help with.
One test I like here is the no-AI landing page: if the page still has a crisp promise, proof, and next action after you remove the mechanism, the AI is probably in the right place. Then you can add it back as trust/proof (“how it works”), not as the headline burden.
Murror
@jim_jeffers Really insightful point about self-selection. The messaging doesn't just change conversion rates — it changes who converts. And the "no-AI landing page" test is a great litmus test we'll definitely try. If the page can't stand on its own without the AI label, the positioning probably needs more work. Appreciate the practical framework.
we are having the same issue with our AI Hive solution since some users are doubt about the AI part a lot
This makes total sense and I think a lot of builders are going to learn this the hard way. "AI-powered" used to be a differentiator, now it's noise. Everyone slaps it on the landing page and users just scroll past it. People don't care what's under the hood, they care if it solves their problem.
We noticed something similar when testing different angles for our own product. The moment we stopped leading with "AI agent platform" and started leading with the outcome ("get your first agent running in production this week"), conversion jumped noticeably. Did the 40% lift hold over time or was it more of an initial spike from the repositioning?
Would you care to take a look at our AI Hive product and sample a bit to see if we need to improve something for now? Thanks in advance